Sunday, August 08, 2004

Kerry Tales, Part XLIII--Holidays in Cambodia

John Kerry's a serial liar. Especially about his service in Vietnam. On March 27, 1986, Senator Kerry discussed his experience in Vietnam on the Senate floor. See 132 Cong. Rec. S3594 (1986). Blogger Tom Maguire reprints the speech, which includes this:

Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared--seared--in me, that says to me, before we send another generation into harm's way we have a responsibility in the U.S. Senate to go the last step, to make the best effort possible in order to avoid that kind of conflict.

Powerline Blog also cites an article Kerry published the Boston Herald on October 14, 1979:

I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real.

Christmas eve, 1968, turned out to be memorable....the crew headed their Swift...only miles from the Cambodian border. Because they were only an hour from that country, Kerry began reading up on Cambodian history.

Kerry attacked President Reagan's actions in Central America, charging they were leading the United States into another Vietnam. He claimed he could recognize the administration's errors because he had firsthand knowledge that the Nixon administration lied about American incursions into Cambodia.

In sum, the Democrats nominated a long-standing liar with a worldview from wonderland. A man whose experiences, though "seared," are false. Someone who relies on his record of service, while withholding relevant service records.

Except among the partisan press--is the fact-checker union on strike?--diagnosing this Dem isn't difficult. In two seconds flat, we'd call Kerry crazy.

[I]nsofar as I understand the rules of Campaign 2004, every time any member of the administration says anything about the present conflict, he is accused by Democrats of shamelessly "politicizing" it. Whereas every time John Kerry waxes nostalgic about those fragrant memories of the Mekong Delta, he should be allowed to take his unending stroll down memory lane unmolested. After all, as everyone from John Edwards to Max Cleland to Bill Clinton has assured us, being a Swift boat commander for four months is the indispensable qualification for being president. When Hillary runs in 2008, no doubt she'll be leaning heavily on her four months running a Swift boat up and down the Shatt al-Arab during the Iraq war.

Tom Maguire dug up an article in the May 8, 2000, US News and World Reports. The opening sentence adds a new claim: "Sen. John Kerry made his first forays into Cambodia during the Vietnam War as a Navy lieutenant on clandestine missions to deliver weapons to anticommunist forces." Kerry's suggested this before. So, candidate Kerry (or your shipmates that Christmas eve): were you acting on secret orders to infiltrate Cambodia? Can Defense, State or CIA confirm?

Thanks, Anon #3! I'm trying to reach people who--though they may have temporarily forgotten events of years ago--appreciate the relevance of carefully documented (i.e., hyperlinked) history. And, like former NYC mayor Ed Koch, I appreciate feedback on "how I'm doing."

So, now we have proof of what many of us have known for at least 30 years. John Kerry is a liar. He's also one of the most self-serving people ever to be elected in Massachusetts. And that's no small task.

Anyway, so what? Do you think the NYT or ABC, etal will pick up this story? Doubt it... Any good (or bad) ideas about how this story could have legs?

Opportunism at its worst. Character flaws. Lies about his Viet Nam experience in 1971 to become a darling of the Anti-war crowd in 1971. Different lies now about his Viet Nam Experience to become elected in 2004.

Wow. I bet JFK wishes he'd just gone to Oxford or something, instead of SE Asia, like Clinton. This guy really looks foolish and he's not fooling anyone. Even his supporters know he's a gasbag. Sadly, the delusional haters on the Left will continue to support JFK no matter what. This election would be a landslide in favor of President Bush if the cabal of media and Hollywood elites hadn't been pummeling him with lies and propaganda for the past two years....

You little patriots are too blinded by your small-minded set-ways to not even Think that US forces were sniffing in-and-around Cambodia in 1968... and Nixon WAS president-elect in December 1968.You might want to check out (especially the last 3 paragraphs): http://www.geocities.com/khmerchronology/memo090568.htm

Serial liar is one explanation for the multiple stories you guys have managed to "prove" untrue. Or perhaps the stories are actually true. That would explain it as well. Kerry has said he took CIA operatives into Cambodia. Considering it was to be kept secret, using the boats was probably the best way to get them in. And Brinkley doesn't say he wasn't there that day. He just doesn't describe that part of the day. Here's the account from the Globe (http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml) which puts it together for you.

So I guess Kerry could have been lying for years about his service and made up the Cambodia thing just for fun. Or he could be telling the truth. The latter seems more likely considering the sources of this stuff. John O'Neil and this Corsi clown who co-wrote it have been revealed as serial partisan hacks. I think you'd all be smart to listen to McCain on this one.

That would explain it as well. Kerry has said he took CIA operatives into Cambodia. Considering it was to be kept secret, using the boats was probably the best way to get them in.Yes, and if it was a "secret operation", he's doing a great job of keeping it secret, isn't he? I wonder at what point he was given clearance to talk about his super-duper secret missions? I mean, these must have been some pretty gonzo things he was entrusted with doing, seeing as how he'd been in Vietnam for less than 4 months, and yet he's being tasked with these great CIA missions!

Let us be crystal clear here. There were military personnel in Cambodia at this point. I have known a pot-full of Ravens that were flying out of Cambodia in civilian clothes. That is not the issue. The issue is whether Lt.(jg) John F. Kerry was in Cambodia. I don't know the Navy. I only know the Air Force. There is, to my knowledge, no evidence that any Navy assets were operating in Cambodia. One man who was on his boat the entire time he was in Vietnam says it didn't happen. Get a grip.

Kerry says he was there. We know U.S. operatives were in Cambodia at the time. We know Kerry drove a boat on a river that went into Cambodia. It seems logical that he may have taken someone in. And it is ridiculous to think that he needs to keep this a secret years after the fact, especially when his point after the war was to expose the lying of the government. Giving a ride to someone into Cambodia probably wasn't that big of a deal in a place and time as chaotic as the Vietnam War. Besides the serial lying thing seems even more far-fetched unless you really hate Kerry. I'll need more proof than this silly conjecture.

His diary did say he was Sa Dec on Christmas Eve and it also said he was traveling toward Cambodia that same day. In Vietnam you could be in more than one place on the same day. I think you can even do that here in America, especially with a vehicle of some sort.

And it is good to know that Janet from Tuscon has no knowledge of the Navy being in Cambodia at that time. That certainly puts that to rest.

Contention 1. Kerry on the floor of the Senate said he was ORDERED into Cambodia and in SECRET. The usually proferred statement from the 1986 Senate speech below. An instant glance shows that Kerry did not say he was "ordered" into Cambodia, secretly or otherwise. "Ordered into Cambodia" then is the first extraneous element proving the smear. The entire speech is available on several websites to see how it has been taken out of context.

I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared—seared—in me.

Contention 2: John O'Neill also claims: "Areas closer than fifty-five miles to the Cambodian border in the area of the Mekong River were patrolled by PBRs, a small river patrol craft, and not by Swift Boats" and quotes a PBR captain to this effect. HOWEVER just two weeks after Kerry arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed under Operation Sealord. Swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. It's also a fact that American soldiers and sailors often crossed into Cambodia without even knowing it, or believed they did when they hadn't.

Contention 3: Kerry is lying because he refers to a Nixon statement before Nixon took office. But in his 1986 floor statement Kerry is clearly reflecting on how Nixon's later statements did not reflect Kerry's own experience.

Contention 4: a 1992 AP article stating Kerry ferried CIA operatives into Cambodia. No one has yet posted the article itself (even as to whether it is Kerry claiming such), but an article still on Kerry's website refers to such activities (unless it is a joke):

The hat was a little mildewy. The green camouflage was fading, the seams fraying.

"My good luck hat," Kerry said, happy to see it. "Given to me by a CIA guy as we went in for a special mission in Cambodia."

In any event, in 1993 Kerry is quoted as saying "On Christmas Eve of 1968, I was on a gunboat in a firefight that wasn't supposed to be taking place." Kerry recalled. "I thought, if I'm killed here, what will my family be told?" Detractors have tried to link this to the so-called "black operation" but in fact the June 2003 Boston Globe story mentioned below states that Kerry's boat being fired upon was merely a violation of the Christmas Eve 1968 truce.

Contention 5: is the overall contention that Kerry has changed his story. The last is the contention that in the 2003 book Tour of Duty author Kranish states that the operation occurred "near Cambodia" but does not specifically say "in Cambodia". The book and the June 2003 Globe article are by the same author, Kranish. In both the book and the Globe article Kranish states the action took place "near Cambodia." Kranish leaves it up to a direct Kerry quote to bring in the "Cambodia incursion:"

To top it off, Kerry said, he had gone several miles inside Cambodia, which theoretically was off limits, prompting Kerry to send a sarcastic message to his superiors that he was writing from the Navy's "most inland" unit.

Kranish also referenced the event in a guest interview on July 7, 2004 on the Hannity & Colmes television show, so in fact the story has been consistently presented. As for Sa Dec, OF COURSE Kerry ended up there when his patrol was over.

Kerry is a pathological liar who has trouble keeping his tall tales straight. People have to start asking, what else is he lying about? Unfortunately for Kerry, the answer to that question is probably rather extensive.

The weak response from the Kerry camp today on this subject isn't going to cut it. For anyone hoping he is going to stick by his Christmas in Cambodia lie, too late, they are already trying to claim he only said he was "near" Cambodia (of course that was before he was confronted with his own words). It's good that they are backing away from the lie he was in Cambodia on Christmas, which can be corroborated that he wasn't, and Kerry now agrees he wasn't. But they still have to deal with his bald face lie on the senate floor, and the several versions of this lie he has told in the last 30 years. It will be interesting to see what line of BS the spin tommorrow.

"Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared--seared--in me"

--John Kerry LYIING on the senate floor about his Vietnam record for political gain.

The Nixon reference in namely from his 1979 Boston Herald interview. Of course in that version his Christmas Eve is spent 5 miles inside Cambodia, and not 60 miles away in Sa Dec where his own journal puts him that night. Also no Khmer Rouge or CIA operatives at this point...guess he hadn't made them up yet.

Senator Kerry's ABB supporters "deconstruction" of what actual written records say are incomprehensible but obviously designed to obfuscate not enlighten. Try a little harder folks...or better yet look up "truth" in the dictionary and realize that you have no concept of what it is. But you don't care do you?

George Bush will have a much easier time in keeping his recollections of Viet Nam clear. He wasn't there.

So the subject of this controversy is whether or not Kerry was 60 miles from the Cambodian border, or 5 miles inside it? Oh my god! What a controversy. The man is a liar!

George Bush can't remember where he was for all of '72. I think I'll grant Kerry a little leeway about who was shooting at him or what border he was near while voluntarily serving our country. At least he wasn't cheezing it out in the National Guard. You guys are so forgiving of anyone who is a republican, and so critical of anyone who is a democrat, that the truth, when it confronts you, appears to be an abstraction that can be easily ignored.

A close associate hints: There's a secret compartment in Kerry's briefcase. He carries the black attaché everywhere. Asked about it on several occasions, Kerry brushed it aside. Finally, trapped in an interview, he exhaled and clicked open his case.

The hat was a little mildewy. The green camouflage was fading, the seams fraying.

"My good luck hat," Kerry said, happy to see it. "Given to me by a CIA guy as we went in for a special mission in Cambodia."

Kerry put on the hat, pulling the brim over his forehead. His blue button-down shirt and tie clashed with the camouflage. He pointed his finger and raised his thumb, creating an imaginary gun. He looked silly, yet suddenly his campaign message was clear: Citizen-soldier. Linking patriotism to public service. It wasn't complex after all; it was Kerry.

Yeah, Phil, Bush has released all of his service records--those that weren't destroyed...oops, wait, we found them--about four times already, dating back to 2000. It's really helped us get to the bottom of what he was doing during the war.

I think we should call Kerry the fantasy candidate not just based upon the "stories" of his experience in Cambodia but also on the basis of his Convention speech where he fantasized about being a "war president." As to the Cambodian story, three members of his crew have stated they were not in Cambodia and two have refused to answer. Did he go alone? These "stories" he wove are not just little white lies but full blown departures from reality. Is this the person we want as Commander in Chief?

It doesn't matter if Kerry lies. All Democrats lie. It's part of their nature. How can we blame Kerry if it's part of his DNA structure. Nobody expects him to tell the truth about his anti-war involvement ,his Senate votes, his wife's finances, his relationship to George Soro, much less four months in Vietnam.

He is content free. 100% no substance. His answer to all of today's problems from the common cold to nuclear weapon development in Iran is "I can do better than Bush". There is never any explanation on how he can make France love us, much less how he can give health care and balance the budget. He is a champion fence straddler. There has never been a political issue that he couldn't straddle. His positions have been mis-characterized as flip-flops. Those nasty Republicans are wrong, he takes every position and never changes. It works when major media acts as his campaigners. God save the Republic...

George Bush isn't running for President based on his service in Vietnam. John Kerry is. In fact, that's about ALL John Kerry is running on. There are people who "remember things differently" than the way John Kerry does - so significantly so that they bring John Kerry's mental stability and integrity into question. It would be extremely foolish for the American public to NOT take this information into consideration in electing our next president. Trying to change the subject - trying to force a comparison between John Kerry's experiences with President Bush's wartime experiences, for example - only prove that this is a serious issue that needs to be examined, and one the candidate (and his party) doesn't want addressed. If major portions of John Kerry's wartime record are false (or worse - based on fraud and deceit), it's absolutely essential that John Kerry address this issue, and show why we should elect someone with such a penchant for this type of gross embelishment. And before anybody takes any cheap shots at me, I am a Vietnam veteran - one who served his full one-year tour without getting a single Purple Heart (self-inflicted or otherwise).

Ha ha, watch the wingnuts whip themselves up into an anti-Kerry frenzy about what Kerry did or did not do in Vietnam, while their chosen leader was doing lines and AWOL from the National Guard and his first lady was running over boyfriends with her car!

What Dr. said. You fuckers can whip yourselves in a frenzy over anything...Fact is that GWB didn't go to Vietnam, and you aren't in Iraq. So you both can fuck yourselves. Get half the courage that Kerry displayed and i won't say a word. They still need good, brave people like you in Iraq. C'mon. Get some, you fucking coward.

The issue is not necessarily what JFK did or didn't do in VietNam, rather, it is the lies he tells about himself. After all the over the top innuendo about our President (who did NOT lie) how can you support a candidate who demonstrably did and does lie?

This will of course all backfire on the Republicans. When the truth comes out, we're going to learn that Kerry secretly won another 4 purple hearts in Cambodia along with the Medal of Honor, a Victoria Cross, a Boy Scout Merit Badge and the palm D'or for the footage of his heroism.

Left alone, he and Johnny Rambo woulda won that war for us....or maybe they did win it and it has not yet been de-classified.

Does this so called incursion into Cambodia to deliver a CIA operative onto Cambodian soil sound familiar? Straight out of the movie Apocalypse Now, on a PBR though not a Swift. Perhaps this is where he gets his tall tale. Wasn't the movie Apocalypse Now released in 1979?

One further note, McCain says this is exactly the kind of libel which was spoken against him, and in fact, it turns out that the same folks are leading the challenge to Kerry's war record as suggested McCain collaborated with his Vietnamese captors when he was campaigning against Bush in 2000. Bush and his people will say anything to stay in power, and unless you believed them about McCain, I don't know why you'd accept their story about Kerry.

Bush's reality distortion field is the privilege of the megarich, who can afford to screw up again and again and not suffer for it; this is not the truth of real Americans.

Lets tell the Truth!!!Kerry is Rich and The Media is bias. He has married one of the most wealthiest womenin the world. With the press and the money they can buy almost anything and any ONE they choose, they can also buy VOTES .... They can rewrite history and twist the truth for their own program. I fear the future of our country if Kerry is elected. Free Speech will only be allowed accordingly to their Truth.

Susan, the media certainly is biased: see this quote from Evan Thomas, the Asst. Managing Editor of Newsweek, on Inside Washington last month:

“There’s one other base here: the media. Let’s talk a little media bias here. The media, I think, wants Kerry to win. And I think they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards -- I’m talking about the establishment media, not Fox, but -- they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there’s going to be this glow about them that some, is going to be worth, collectively, the two of them, that’s going to be worth maybe 15 points.”

"Wasn't eight years of grief the country went through because a president parses words and is a know liar."

So let's see, a President lies about a blow job, the economy goes great and we are at peace. And we are a 'country in grief'.

Vs.

A President lies to get us into a war, erases a multi-trillion dollar surplus, gets 1,000 soldiers killed, kills 10,000 civilians, lies about the $150,000,000,000 EXTRA cost of a health care system, but DOESN"T GET LAID, and you folks scream for 'Four More Years?'.

Wild.

Oh yeah, and if some of those bullets that missed Kerry has been three or four inches to the left or to the right, he's just be another name on a wall.

That's why people call such actions 'Heroic'.

People who attack that kind of record are usually called traitors, but given their propensity to use that tactic (McCain, Cleland, Kerry), I think 'neo-cons' is a more accurate appelation for those that attack the patriotism, for political gain, of those who put their lives on the line, the front line, for the country.

If there was a believable answer to Kerry's Cambodian lies, the DNC war room would have broadcast it from here to Phnom Penh by now. What is their answer? Dead silence. The issue is only an issue because it is so central to Kerry's self-spun mythology. HE has made Vietnam the central issue of his campaign. Whatever George Bush was doing during that war is irrelevant; he is not running on his activities during that time. Kerry is. Personally, I would like to hear Kerry boast about his activities during his 20 years in the Senate, and what a friend of the military he was then.

Go Vice President...Dick laid it out to Kerry today. We need more truth exposed.......Kerry said look at my record YES lets see his record in the senate. Let us expose his ideas and his votes ..........If this wasn't so serious I would be laughing at all this Soap Opera Dem. Spin.

Go Vice President...Dick laid it out to Kerry today. We need more truth exposed.......Kerry said look at my record YES lets see his record in the senate. Let us expose his ideas and his votes ..........If this wasn't so serious I would be laughing at all this Soap Opera Dem. Spin.

Anonymous who posted that the half-day in Sa Doc wasn't in his diary should go and read it properly:

"A briefing with the Navy and another refueling and then away again. You have lost half the day just relaxing at Sa Doc, taking in the scene and basking in the security of your thoughts and the memories that today come steadily and quickly."

From Kerry's Fitness Report (page 24 of this PDF)http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Fitness_Reports.pdf

"LTJG Kerry was assigned to this division for only a short time but during that time exhibited all the traits desired of an officer in a combat environment. He frequently exhibited a high sense of imagination and judgement in planning operations against the enemy in the Mekong Delta. Involved in several enemy initiated fire fights, including an ambush during the Christmas truce, he effectively suppressed enemy fire and is unofficially credited with 20 enemy killed in action. Though relatively new to the PCF he is thoroughly knowledgeable of all aspects of his boat and PCF operations. He was instrumental in planning of highly successful Sea Lords Operations. He was cited for his performance during action against the enemy by Commander Task Force in his message 080807Z Jan 69."Note that "performance during action" doesn't sound like his only participation was "planning".

Now to add that "Sea Lords Operations" involved incursions into Cambodia:http://www.pcf45.com/sealords/sealords.htm

As to whether it's implausible that a Swift boat might go into Cambodia and drop someone off there, see http://www.pcf45.com/sealords/yrbm16/yrbm16.html

"The fellow on the right was a freelance journalist and photographer that had caught a ride into Cambodia on a US Swift Boat. He asked to be dropped off on the shore to proceed on his own. It is hoped that he found what he was looking for and survived to tell about it."Sure doesn't sound like that was a "physical impossibility", as Steve Gardner claimed.

In fact, the Navy said Swift boats were involved in those Cambodian incursions:http://www.ironbutterfly.ws/pressrl4.html

"An acronym for 'Southeast Asia Lake, Ocean, River, Delta Strategy', SEALORDS started on October 18, 1968 when a Navy Swift boat (PCF) reconnoitered the entrance to the Cua Lon River on the Gulf of Thailand side of the Ca Mau Penisula. Following this mission, Swift boat crewmen conducted a series of incursions along the southern rivers and canals upsetting base camps and cutting Viet Cong supply and communication lines."So Gardner simply lied about it being a "physical impossibility" for a Swift boat to enter Cambodian waters.

Yet it was on the basis of Gardner's (now disproved) claim that Kerry was called a liar.

Since the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces in Vietnam said Swift boats were going into Cambodia starting in October 1968, and Kerry's Fitness Report says he was "instrumental" in that operation, it seems Kerry's story does have some official corroboration. But his accusers are now proved liars.

Kerry was based at Sa Dec at the time. This was a base for Navy river boats patrolling the Cambodian border and conducting incursions — in fact, it was later made the headquarters of Swift Boat Coastal Division 13 because of its advantageous position.http://pcf45.com/sealords/sadec/sadec.html

That is, it wasn't the Swift boats' "northernmost patrol area", but the place they went from to do patrols and incursions, and returned to afterwards.

The Fitness Report refers to "an ambush during the Christmas truce", which indicates that the attack happened in the field, on a mission or patrol, not "an attack on the base". So this had to have been at least toward Cambodia from Sa Dec, since missions & patrols from Sa Dec went either along or across the Cambodian border. In fact, Kerry's contemporaneous journal entry of that Christmas firefight refers to going back toward Sa Dec after the incident. If Sa Dec had been his "northernmost patrol area" and not his base, he'd have been going away from Sa Dec at the end of his patrol.

HERES THE TRUTHKERRY did it again his party was giving him high glory for being the Vice Pres of the Intelligent Comm.Did he set the record straight NOoooo He took the credit It was Sen. Bob KEERY....Not John Kerry Gotca.........................

Lets talk about his COMMITMENTS He committed himself to the service of our Country. he served for a 120 days (more or less). Then quit.He committed himself to the Navy. he came home and called his fellow servicemen Murderers.He committed himself to serve his fellow servicemen he joined up with Jane Fonda and threw his medals into the face of our country.He committed himself to marriage. he fathered two daughters and filed for an annulment. Then quit.He committed himself to serve in the Senate. his attendance record is to be questioned.He committed himself to serve in the Intelligence Commission. his attendance is about the same as his service to Our Country a 120 days (more or less).He now asks our Fellow Country Men to trust him.He says He is Committed to our Country . What is he Committed to ????????????? DO YOU REALLY TRUST HIM.

If it were a Republican challenger putting so much emphasis on a Swift Boat Career in Vietnam & so little on anything else that he has done in public life, "Saturday Night Live" would surely be doing a series of skits with the Republcan Challenger & his band of brothers going all over the world on their Swift Boat solving problems like Cartoon Action Heroes. They would start out with a scene similar to Kerry & his guys making a mock heroic landing at Boston Harbor, then cut to scenes where they are in the boat again being propelled onto dry land & into the mounainous Pakistan-Afghanistan border area. They swiftly ride in their boat through those mountains up to the mouth of a cave, then into it. They would jump out, Rambo-like, guns blazing, then they corner & capture a shaking & whimpering Bin Laden. That would be just one in a series of Action Hero skits they would be doing if Kerry were a Republican.

1. It was possible for a Swift Boat to enter Cambodia through the major routes but these were blocked.

2. Kerry and PCF-44 were based at Cat Lo, not Sa Dec. Their patrols did not go farther than the area around Sa Dec.

3. The Fitness Report referred to an ambush but not action inside Cambodia. Each OinC would have gotten at least the sort of generic remarks that Kerry got regarding Sealords.

4. The incursions mentioned were raids into VC-controlled areas within Vietnam, not into Cambodia.

5. Men who served on PCF-44 say they did not go into Cambodia. All told, their period of service covers all the time that Kerry was in charge of PCG-44.

6. A pro-Kerry Swiftee also does not recall going into Cambodia. Whether wandering aimlessly or on secret missions. This man, Medieros, served the entire time that Kerry was in charge of PCF-94.

7. Swift boats were not suited to steath missions. They wre limited to the deeper and larger routes which restricted options for entry. The Swiftees were not equipped nor trained for such missions. If there had been special forces inside Cambodia at that time, they did not hitch a ride with Kerry in a fifty-foot boat and its two diesel engines buzzing along shallow canals in the dark.

John Kerry is so full of shit he is a danger to those around him. Should they light a cigerette they could be killed by a methane gas expolosion. Kerry is an acknowleded phony. When over 200 officers and men that served in his unit signed petitions that he is a phoney what more do you need?He is a disgrace to the US Navy Officers Corps.

Kerry never said he was sent on any sort of secret mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968. He said he was on a routine patrol that left Sa Dec and went up to the border. Read the long excerpt from his journal describing the patrol in Brinkley's book.

The patrol at the border was confirmed by at least two of his crewmembers.

The boat, along with the two PBRs they were with, were ambushed. Also described in Kerry's journal excerpt published by Brinkley, and mentioned in the Kranish book.

The ambush was documented by George Elliott in Kerry's fitness report.

Kerry told Kranish and implied to Brinkley that he thought he'd crossed the Cambodian border during the patrol and/or ambush.

Once again, he never claimed to have been sent by Nixon, Johnson, or anyone else on a secret mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968.

He did say that he went on one or more missions in January and/or February 1969, on his next command, PCF 44. No one has ever disproved that.

Just thought a little good information after all this time wouldn't hurt.